Literature DB >> 26675938

Safety, efficiency and learning curves in robotic surgery: a human factors analysis.

Ken Catchpole1, Colby Perkins2,3, Catherine Bresee4, M Jonathon Solnik5, Benjamin Sherman6, John Fritch6, Bruno Gross6, Samantha Jagannathan6, Niv Hakami-Majd6, Raymund Avenido2, Jennifer T Anger2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Expense, efficiency of use, learning curves, workflow integration and an increased prevalence of serious incidents can all be barriers to adoption. We explored an observational approach and initial diagnostics to enhance total system performance in robotic surgery.
METHODS: Eighty-nine robotic surgical cases were observed in multiple operating rooms using two different surgical robots (the S and Si), across several specialties (Urology, Gynecology, and Cardiac Surgery). The main measures were operative duration and rate of flow disruptions-described as 'deviations from the natural progression of an operation thereby potentially compromising safety or efficiency.' Contextual parameters collected were surgeon experience level and training, type of surgery, the model of robot and patient factors. Observations were conducted across four operative phases (operating room pre-incision; robot docking; main surgical intervention; post-console).
RESULTS: A mean of 9.62 flow disruptions per hour (95 % CI 8.78-10.46) were predominantly caused by coordination, communication, equipment and training problems. Operative duration and flow disruption rate varied with surgeon experience (p = 0.039; p < 0.001, respectively), training cases (p = 0.012; p = 0.007) and surgical type (both p < 0.001). Flow disruption rates in some phases were also sensitive to the robot model and patient characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Flow disruption rate is sensitive to system context and generates improvement diagnostics. Complex surgical robotic equipment increases opportunities for technological failures, increases communication requirements for the whole team, and can reduce the ability to maintain vision in the operative field. These data suggest specific opportunities to reduce the training costs and the learning curve.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Automation; Error; Human Factors; Robotic surgery; Safety; Teamwork

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26675938     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4671-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  25 in total

1.  New technology and health care costs--the case of robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Gabriel I Barbash; Sherry A Glied
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Improving patient safety by identifying latent failures in successful operations.

Authors:  Ken R Catchpole; Anthony E B Giddings; Michael Wilkinson; Guy Hirst; Trevor Dale; Marc R de Leval
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.982

3.  The influence of non-technical performance on technical outcome in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Authors:  A Mishra; K Catchpole; T Dale; P McCulloch
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Flow disruptions during trauma care.

Authors:  Daniel Shouhed; Renaldo Blocker; Alex Gangi; Eric Ley; Jennifer Blaha; Daniel Margulies; Douglas A Wiegmann; Ben Starnes; Cathy Karl; Richard Karl; Bruce L Gewertz; Ken R Catchpole
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 5.  Work system design for patient safety: the SEIPS model.

Authors:  P Carayon; A Schoofs Hundt; B-T Karsh; A P Gurses; C J Alvarado; M Smith; P Flatley Brennan
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2006-12

6.  Implementing a standardized safe surgery program reduces serious reportable events.

Authors:  Terrence Loftus; Deb Dahl; Bridget OHare; Karlene Power; Yvette Toledo-Katsenes; Ryan Hutchison; David Jacofsky; Kathleen Harder
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-10-05       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Patterns of communication breakdowns resulting in injury to surgical patients.

Authors:  Caprice C Greenberg; Scott E Regenbogen; David M Studdert; Stuart R Lipsitz; Selwyn O Rogers; Michael J Zinner; Atul A Gawande
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Identification of systems failures in successful paediatric cardiac surgery.

Authors:  K R Catchpole; A E B Giddings; M R de Leval; G J Peek; P J Godden; M Utley; S Gallivan; G Hirst; T Dale
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2006 Apr 15-May 15       Impact factor: 2.778

9.  Flow disruptions in trauma care handoffs.

Authors:  Ken R Catchpole; Alexandra Gangi; Renaldo C Blocker; Eric J Ley; Jennifer Blaha; Bruce L Gewertz; Douglas A Wiegmann
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 2.192

10.  Capturing intraoperative process deviations using a direct observational approach: the glitch method.

Authors:  Lauren Morgan; Eleanor Robertson; Mohammed Hadi; Ken Catchpole; Sharon Pickering; Steve New; Gary Collins; Peter McCulloch
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  21 in total

Review 1.  Work-system interventions in robotic-assisted surgery: a systematic review exploring the gap between challenges and solutions.

Authors:  Falisha Kanji; Ken Catchpole; Eunice Choi; Myrtede Alfred; Kate Cohen; Daniel Shouhed; Jennifer Anger; Tara Cohen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  A systematic review of the learning curve in robotic surgery: range and heterogeneity.

Authors:  I Kassite; T Bejan-Angoulvant; H Lardy; A Binet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Effects of Flow Disruptions on Mental Workload and Surgical Performance in Robotic-Assisted Surgery.

Authors:  Jeannette Weber; Ken Catchpole; Armin J Becker; Boris Schlenker; Matthias Weigl
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Diagnosing barriers to safety and efficiency in robotic surgery.

Authors:  Ken R Catchpole; Elyse Hallett; Sam Curtis; Tannaz Mirchi; Colby P Souders; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Ergonomics       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 2.778

5.  Work systems analysis of sterile processing: assembly.

Authors:  Myrtede Alfred; Ken Catchpole; Emily Huffer; Larry Fredendall; Kevin M Taaffe
Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf       Date:  2020-10-19       Impact factor: 7.035

6.  Transition from Laparoscopic Totally Extraperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair to Robotic Transabdominal Preperitoneal Inguinal Hernia Repair: A Retrospective Review of a Single Surgeon's Experience.

Authors:  Omar Yusef Kudsi; Justin C McCarty; Nivedh Paluvoi; Allan S Mabardy
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Flow disruptions in robotic-assisted abdominal sacrocolpopexy: does robotic surgery introduce unforeseen challenges for gynecologic surgeons?

Authors:  Colby P Souders; Ken Catchpole; Alex Hannemann; Ronit Lyon; Karyn S Eilber; Catherine Bresee; Tara Cohen; Matthias Weigl; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-04-30       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  Barriers to efficiency in robotic surgery: the resident effect.

Authors:  Monica Jain; Brian T Fry; Luke W Hess; Jennifer T Anger; Bruce L Gewertz; Ken Catchpole
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 9.  Human factors in robotic assisted surgery: Lessons from studies 'in the Wild'.

Authors:  Ken Catchpole; Ann Bisantz; M Susan Hallbeck; Matthias Weigl; Rebecca Randell; Merrick Kossack; Jennifer T Anger
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 3.661

10.  Is non-stop always better? Examining assumptions behind the concept of flow disruptions in studies of robot-assisted surgery.

Authors:  Birgitte Bruun; Jannie Lysgaard Poulsen; Perle Møhl; Lene Spanager
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-07-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.